Sexual assault is vastly underreported and underprosecuted worldwide; incredibly, most survivors are in a hostile situation when trying to prosecute a case. And in those instances where cases actually make it to court, there is nary one where the alleged rapist is convicted. The conviction rates for rape cases are incredibly low in all the other areas concerning violent crimes. This clearly shows that problems in law enforcement, appropriate legal systems, and society in general make it hard for victims to report and for their cases to succeed.

One of the first and key issues is that a majority of survivors never come forward. In the United States, only about one-third of rapes reach the eyes of law enforcement. Those raped feel ashamed and scared of ensuing retribution; some refrain from telling authorities because of lack of trust or belief that anyone will ever take them seriously. In some cases, where survivors actually tell their stories, fingers are pointed right at their faces.

The result of the credibility gap created by rape myths is that police never take the reports seriously, prosecutors refuse to bring cases based on weak prosecution, and juries reject testimonies that do not meet their criteria of “real” rape. Studies have concluded that rape myths strongly shape juror decision-making, such as the belief that a victim must resist violently or that the delayed report implies dishonesty. 

Moreover, police departments have serious issues with organizational structure and training. Investigating cases of sexual assault requires special-skilled officers who can preserve evidence, interview victims without instigating more trauma, and support the testimony when there are no witnesses. However, many police departments deny having any special task force working on sexual violence; general duty officers may not be trained or supported to efficiently deal with such cases.

The gathering of physical evidence in a case would be a challenge due to the time span between the actual crime and its report, so there is, generally, not much to rely on for evidence in the first place. Even when technical medical exams are out of the question, rape kits are sometimes handled improperly or never used. With such barriers, prosecution is difficult as many cases rely almost entirely on the survivor’s testimony, which juries often question.

In criminal trials, the prosecution bears the burden of proving guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt" to a jury. This high standard safeguards the rights of defendants, but it creates special hurdles in rape cases, which usually consist of two incompatible accounts and minimal physical evidence. Unlike other violent crimes, sexual assaults often do not exhibit any physical injury.

Besides, legal definitions concerning consent create hurdles. Certain jurisdictions are still phrased in legal resistance, while others do not have clear affirmative consent standards. This vagueness makes room for interpretation, often in favor of the defendant. Australia, for instance, has started addressing this situation: Queensland has just launched reforms that adopt a "yes means yes" model, which incorporates voluntary, continued, and communicated consent. 

Even at trial, cultural attitudes play an active role in determining outcomes. For instance, jurors may mildly import such rape myths -they believe false accusations happen rarely or that somehow a victim's sexual history becomes key to understanding the case- into the deliberations. Such biases can overwhelm evidence and testimony. While most legal reforms have focused on invasive questioning, loopholes and judicial discretion still permit damaging insinuations to the jury.

The barriers are clear. In the U.S., nearly 50 of 1,000 sexual assault incidents end with an arrest, 28 cases progress into felony convictions, and only 25 offenders spend time in prison for such acts. In England and Wales, in 2024, fewer than three cases in every 100 rape offences recorded by police resulted in a charge or summons. In New South Wales, Australia, conviction rates for sexual assault have remained below 10% of reported cases. These statistics demonstrate a gap in justice far wider than that seen in other violent crime cases.

The solution for these problems is simple. A change in handling cases by police, prosecutors, and courts. 

Advanced Specialization and Training 

The police should receive training on how to approach sexual assault cases. Dedicated units with expertise in evidence gathering and victim support can reduce errors and help gain the victims' trust. 

Better Evidence Handling

Forensic evidence must be collected carefully and tested properly. The government must make sure that rape kits are being issued in sexual assault cases and that medical personnel are capable and trained in performing this type of examination. More importantly, digital evidence is vital in collecting and preserving, such as those in text messages and social media activity.

Legal Reforms on Consent

Revising laws to conform to the affirmative consent standards, where consent must be affirmative, voluntary, and ongoing, can lessen vagueness and strengthen prosecutions.

Victim and Support Advocacy.

Advocacy in reports, legal aid, and psychological support increases the likelihood that victims will be bound to report the offense, and remain active throughout often lengthy proceedings. 

Educate Jury and Myth Bust

Courts can reduce bias when jurors are given instructions exonerating common myths about rape. It has been proven that juror education contributes to reducing biases and improving fairness. 

Accountability and Transparency 

Reports should be published by agencies, covering the fields of reporting, charging, and conviction rates. Transparency helps identify weaknesses and ultimately propels reform.

Rape convictions remain rare, not because most allegations are false, but because survivors face numerous challenges to get justice. From the first moment of reporting through the final stages of trial, institutional failures and cultural biases combine to make sure that they end up losing in court.

Justice for survivors means more than convictions. It means being believed, supported, and treated with dignity. Yet raising conviction rates is a necessary part of restoring trust. Until law enforcement and courts address the deep flaws in how rape cases are investigated and prosecuted, survivors will continue to be denied the justice they deserve.

Give us your take on the Roundtable.